"When asking why things have gone wrong, never rule out stupidity" Catalunya is the most indebted region of the Iberian peninsula; how are these people going to get loans when they run away from their obligations? With their real unemployment around 20% if not more, the politicians jumping around like a bunch of mountebanks, proclaiming a victory while people are starving boggles the reasoning mind.

What currency is Catalunya going to use? If I invested in euros, I would not view Catalunya as a safe place to invest. And what are the terms, if any, that Catalunya remains in the euro? It would have to be accepted as a separate state, and be required to pay off all its debts before being allowed to join the eurozone.

Incidentally, I experienced something like this at a personal level many years ago: I had to choose betwen being much richer and 'powerful' under a very rich and influential older brother of mine or be 'poorer' and less 'powerful' but independent and wholly myself. I chose the latter option and I am glad I did.

The problem is that too many people in Europe see identity as a collective issue. In my view, it would be better to see human beings from an "individualistic" point of view, that is: identity is an individual matter.

Nations are not objective entities. For example, I see myself as European first. Other people, on the contrary, have rather a national or regional identity. But we don't need political parties or states to assert our identities. I can see Milan or Berlin as my home, but still be a citizen of Italy or Germany. I think we should finally leave behind this 20th century logic of identity and concentrate on fixing the economy, the institutions of the EU and the welfare of the people on the continent.

Let´s not forget nation-building requires something close to unanimity on the participants.

I do not think over 3% of Kiwis would agree to be part of Australia-whatever that would mean, nation-states are unnatural and not all that innocuous inventions in my view, but that´s another matter- .On the other side 30-45% of the people living in Catalonia want to remain "Spanish"-again, it is to be wondered what that exactly is-at all costs, according both to the polls I´ve read and recent election results.It would be extremely unfair to either the small majority or the large minority to take any action that is quite contrary to their wishes, and thus a compromise, such as the current semi-federal arrangement, with whatever modifications, seems like the logical way out.

I think it is financially driven. They don't want to pay for the debts and bad management of the rest of Spain, and I agree. Just as the UK doesn't want to pour money into the black-hole which is Europe, making political and not economic decisions. People want the power to say 'No! You are not acting in our best interests!' and the further the power base gets away from us, the smaller our voice gets. I am very anti-nationalist, but I understand why they want independence.

I fully agree with you. Most of the time nationalistic matters are driven by politicians and other interest groups for their own selfish benefits.
Most of the people could not care less who they receive their safety, employment, food and drink from as long as they have their necessities.
Today nations, border lose their significance in the global, interdependent world, physically, and especially virtually we have intermingled, and most of the serious, life changing decisions are happening above national level anyway.
For example when supporting sport team do people care who owns their favourite teams, who the coach is and who scores the goals? many times they do not even speak the same language.
Today as you suggest people need to get used to being unique individuals within a global, interconnected human network.
The responsibility of the leaders is to move towards organizing such a new human system with proper supra-national governance based on mutual responsibility and cooperation instead of retreating into the past with separatist, isolationist, nationalistic agendas.

More than 3% of Kiwis move from New Zealand to Australia permanently every year. And it's not better beaches of sheilas that they're attracted by.... Do you think they'd have objections to becoming Australians without even having to pack bags?

1) national identity is a question of the heart, therefore irrational. For instance, I have a friend of comes from Reunion, a French island in the Indian Ocean. Why does France want to keep this island? I guess it's because of sentimental attachment to the idea of Empire. Or what about the UK? England would never expel Wales or support the independence of Wales, although its economy is weak and a burden for the UK. This irrationality is the reason why I am against nationalism. Creating a collective identity based on nationality doesn't work, exactly because this identity cannot be imposed on the individuals and creates tension not only between different regions of a country but also between locals and immigrants. One of the reasons why integration of immigrants is so hard in Europe is that the locals ask immigrants to become like them, which is not only impossible but also very vague. Locals themselves, in fact, have their own individual ideas and values, so that collective national identity becomes a blurred and vague term that can be easily manipulated for every political purpose.

2) Nationalism is often abused as a way to vent frustration and anger due to economic instability. the problem is that nationalism addresses the feelings of the people and their need to find someone or something to blame. It costs much more effort to think about how to fix the economy. We in Europe should re-think our economic policy and in my view break free from a certain concept of free market economic policy that hasn't been working. Founding more and more "ethnically homogeneous" states is not going to solve our real problems.

The current situation is helping nobody. Catalonia needs the rest of Spain as its market and the Madrid needs Catalonia has its prime earner.

So to diffuse the stand off, Spain could offer up something similar to the Austro-Hungarian Compromise. Catalonia gets its own parliaments and prime ministers, in return it contributes to the bottom line of Madrid in the form of infrastructure and defense.

I see you are not properly informed. Catalunya already has their own parlament and governement with its own ministers (consellers) which some earn more money than the national ones. For instance Mr. Mas, the regional president doubles the salary of Mr. Rajoy the national prime minister. What happens in Catalonia is a long brain washed educational system that blames all to an imaginary enemy called Madrid (Spain). Even the so repeated fiscal imbalance is not as big as they claim (own study asked by CiU) and not contrasted by any serious study.

Could be that Mas is earning more than Rajoy. And could be that the imbalance it is not so big. I'm not a big fan of CiU either. But (1) I am fed up of Spanish politicians, and in particular of PP; (2) I feel I am Catalan. You should hear what brainwashing means, specially after elections, when almost all Spanish media say that now referendum is not possible because Mas lost lots of votes. But if you look at the numbers, parties that are in favor of a referendum increased their representatives in the parliament (from 85 to 87). So I don't understand why they insist so much on that. Moreover, I don't think that organize a referendum should be considered something illegal (to ask for the people what they think... really...). And when you hear all this politicians of PP and media, you want to be independent as soon as possible.

Hello Rycka, (1) and (2) reasons are your personal reasons, nothing to comment on that. The brainwash in Catalonia happens on the media all the times and on the educational system. I lived there and I was really unconfortable sometimes (specially in small towns) when all spanish symbols where diminished. It is offensive and the nationalists should behave as they claim to others. For instance they claim the usage of Catalan language in the administration, fine, but then in the Catalan schools the spanish is banned, only catalan is used regardless half the population (catalans as well) speak that language. As for the referendum, yes agree there is a majority in favor according to the program, but its is not realistic, for instance PSC or IC voters will not completely support that. ERC would never enter in the government and even Unio would be reluctact given the fact that the overall CiU lost 12 seats!. There is support yes but I doubt is for real, it is much a protest for the crisis.

Hello daniel-esp. I would like to know what you understand for brainwashing. I think that Spanish media is more "brainwashing" than Catalan media in this topic, as I explained before (just paying attention to CiU lose of votes, but not the global result of the elections). I live in Catalunya and for me what results strange is that I cannot use Catalan language with people working in many public places (like bars or shops). Anyways, I know Spanish and it is very fine to speak it. And 100% of people with education in Catalunya can speak Spanish properly, although they were taught in Catalan most of the time in school. This, for me, means that this educational system is a good way for people to learn both languages (although not everybody can still speak Catalan properly). And regarding a referendum you say "it is not realistic". Well, fisrt I didn't count the votes of PSC when I said 87 representatives (over 135). Secondly, ICV clearly said they are in favor of a referendum (and people voted them knowing this fact). Third, it is not necessary that ERC is in the government to organize a referendum. But specially, even if we suppose that it is not realistic, what if they organize a referendum? Then it will be realistic and we will know for real how many people supports the independence. I think there is nothing more realistic than to celebrate a referendum and let people vote.

A setback for Artur Mas and CiU, not for Catalans who demand their right to decide if they want to keep being a part of Spain or become an independent country, like Norway in 1905, Lithuania in 1990, Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, Slovakia in 1993, Montenegro in 2007 &c.

YOU GOT IT WRONG:
- ICV-EUiA voters (13 SEATS) are not pro-independence (every independentist in Catalonia knows this).
- Not all CiU voters are pro-independence (consider Unió-Duran, it's a confussion case similar to that of PSC).

INDEED, THERE IS ANOTHER DATA YOU MISSED:
- You refer to the seats, but not to the vote's percentages. Even admiting that all CiU voters are proindependence, CiU+ERC+CUM sum up 46% of the votes. However, the stupid territorial voting system of Spain gives them more power.

So... independence loses. No matter how many children nacionalist get to brainwash in public schools in Catalonia (worth a sociological and pathological study), the LOGIC speaks for itself: in terms of economy and prosperity Catalonia needs Spain and Spain need Catalonia.

1) Normally I don't even reply to two-comment posters who register on The Economist a few hours before just to post on a given thread and obviously have an agenda. I will make an exception.

2) I NEVER said that ICV-EUiA is "pro-independence", you are MANIPULATING my words, in fact what I wrote was "...for Catalans who demand their right to decide..." (fortunately verba volant sed scripta manent), and as far as I know they support the right to decide. Even some in the PSC do.

3) You confuse independendists (ERC, etc) with people who support the right to decide, including "soberanistas", etc. You MISCATEGORIZE things.

4) Yes, I referred to the seats, not to voting percentages, among other things because I did not intend to spend several hours writing a 5,000-character essay, you know, I don't live for this. Why don't you do it yourself, instead of whining? Anyway, SEATS (not the cars... :-), not votes (ask Izquierda Unida, Rosa Díez, etc) count in a parliament. Such is life. If you don't like it, sue the Spanish and Catalan governments or tell it to the Marines.

You do understand what "TOTAL PEL DRET A DECIDIR" means in Catalan, don't you? In case you don't, in Spanish (Castilian) it's "TOTAL, POR EL DERECHO A DECIDIR" and in English "TOTAL, FOR THE RIGHT TO DECIDE". Nobody says a priori anything about independence, that's just one among two equally respectable options that would come later. Only you Why?

6) So, WHO GOT IT WRONG?

7) Answer: YOU.So, I hope you will STAND CORRECTED, as people who are wrong are supposed to do.

8) And in case you have forgotten what I wrote, here it is again. I just added some bolding.

A setback for Artur Mas and CiU, not for Catalans who demand their right to decide if they want to keep being a part of Spain or become an independent country, like Norway in 1905, Lithuania in 1990, Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, Slovakia in 1993, Montenegro in 2007 &c.

9) Again: verba volant, scripta manent.

10) You use a lot of caps (uppercase) so I reciprocate lest you don't hear me.

11) If you don't understand it, don't expect me to explain it to you again.

12) I don't comment on what you say in your penultimate paragraph because I don't care and you are entitled to your opinions, of course.
As for your last line, yes, I agree (at last!), that's why my thinking has always been extremely individualistic, not collective, whether I consider a problem concerning Wagner and Verdi, Marx and Bakunin or... Spain and Catalonia.

If that's not enough for you (well, it's a Catalan newspaper written in Catalan! =:-o isn't it?) why don't you listen (I bet you do, anyway) to the famous guru Federico Jiménez Losantos, one of the worst demagogues and Catalonia haters in Spain? He has been repeating the "87-28" formula ad nauseam (he's very repetitive) in his radio station, esRadio and in other places. Do you want a link? Tell me.

By the way, if according to you only 46% or less of Catalan voters want independence and "independence losses"... Why does a simple referendum terrify you so much? You españolistas have already won it, haven't you?

You were objectively wrong, "corrected" me wrongly AND SHOUTED AT ME. I am still waiting an apology and a "I stand corrected". Or you are not a caballero, a gentleman?

You people are doing a great disservice to the "cause" you are supposed to defend.

yes, there are many proofs:
The biggest one is that CiU headquarters have been bailed by Justice due to uncountable cases of corruption.
If you want to open your eyes, just google:
- Caso Banca Catalana
- Caso ITV
- Caso Palau
...

The "Caso Banca Catalana" was a bank run provoked by the Socialists, through articles in "El País". It was a purely political maneuver. Even after many years of prosecution, neither Jordi Pujol nor nobody else could be proven to have received any illicit money. You may like or not, but that's the reality. And for all I know, M. Pujol keeps living simple life. I could point to other politicians, Spanish or not, who have really become rich.

Fully agree with Comte Arnau above. There was even a special prosecutor, Mr. Jiménez Villarejo, named in this case (Banca Catalana) who worked full time for years and had to call it quits.
Be careful with googling: You search for "the sun rises from the west" and you will surely find some entries -therefore, you can support EVERY argument this way, which however does not mean that it is a valid one.
As for ITV, I see no indictment up to this very moment. Caso PALAU was brought to the courts by, precisely, the Catalan Government itself.
And for the "EL MUNDO" trash, there are a number of criminal cases brought by the "fingered" persons for libel.

So what? Which proofs? which cases? ITV for one, it is dragging for quite a while and no indictments have been issued... which means it is difficult to prove at the very least.
Since the "Palau" case was brought to the courts by the Catalan government itself, I believe you do not mean the Catalan Government to be guilty here?
And as for the libel cases against "EL MUNDO", do you really believe that if the plaintiffs were guilty, they would be, on top, as stupid as to shoot themselves so as to face a counter suit seeking to redress prejudices on top of the penalties for corruption?
Oh, and by the way: I gather you "drop" the Banca Catalana case, now?

Of course he CANNOT give any proof. In the 80 the case Banca Catalana splashed but ultimately Jordi Pujol was not charged. And the cases of ITV and Palau have not been judjed yet.
guest-ljjilmo ans Menga100, stop lying please. I suppose you are Spanish because you use Spanish words. You should learn about English People. They love democracy. As the UK has done with Scotland, Spain should let the people of Catalonia vote.

The real reason to the independence rise now is the important problem that exist between two economic models (the spanish and the catalan) that are really oposed.
One example: Europe has interest to reduce costs using a harbour in the south of Europe to receive maritime traffic from Asia (now it arrive mainly in Rotterdan and Hamburg). Using Catalonia, will be a reduction of 4 to 5 days in maritime traffic.
Catalonia push for more that 15 years to invest in his harbour and in the connection with Europe, but the Spanish government say no althouhg Spain has more kilometers of High Speed rails than any other european country (to go to the spanish politics houses with lines when the passangers by day are less than 15 per train in average) , but Catalonia is waiting for more than 15 years one conection with France and the rest of europe that doesn't exist yet.

If the majority of their population vote for independence, there will probably do an independence declaration. This should be preceded by a vote in the Parliament where representative hould have the right to vote freely. After that, Catalonia should communicate the process internationally, establish alliances with key countries and agree with them terms for recognition.

Of course Catalonians aren't going to go to war. In any case. But I think that a democratic process will give democratic legitimacy to Catalonia’s independence.

The Economist should avoid taking a clear stance for or against Catalan independence, unless there is some coherent argument that the more efficient scale of government is the Spanish rather than Catalan level.

Clearly, there are areas of government activity better coordinated exclusively on the largest scale possible (preferably super-national or near-global), e.g. court systems, business law, military, liquidity support, civil & human rights, any regulation of business, etc. For that kind of stuff, there's the EU.

Against that, there are more mundane activities: teaching, policing, social policies, infrastructure investment, urban planning, redistribution of wealth or income, cultural activities, marketing & coordination activities, supporting languages, etc are the areas where government spends most of its revenue (and where most civil service employees are employed). With this type of activity, there are no obvious scale economies, and few likely benefits from coordinating closely over vast geographical or economic areas. Quite the opposite - more scale just means more flawed communication, less accountability, worse decisions, bad resource allocation, etc.

The last category then would seem to be a very good argument for independence for Catalonia, Scotland, etc within the EU - and for the continued expansion of the EU & similar structures, even beyond Europe.

The goal should be efficient & accountable government - not the preservation of ossified legacy states & bad institutions.

Any argument for the independence of Catalonia, Scotland, or wherever, based on the assumption of EU membership (continued or delayed) has to allow for what that means - both to the prospective independents and to other EU member states. As examples:

First, would the states losing separatist regions be willing to accept them as EU partners? Second, the separatists would have to meet the usual EU entry requirements (including contributions to the EU budget)? Are the separatists sure that they could do this? Third, any agreed additions to the number of member states would, of course, increase the bureaucracy in Brussels (eg catalan translators).

The only thing that is particularly dangerous about a break-off of Catalonia is that would likely cause a domino of other separatist Spanish regions - namely, the Basque region (whose violent attempts an independance had calmed down) but also, perhaps, Galicia, and perhaps Valencia

What should really matter is the efficient level of government, and making good decisions. Sometimes, it's worth spending more on administration in order to improve decision making competences and arrive at higher productivity & better outcomes. (Here, the political obsession with "front line workers" does enormous damage to the public sector, for instance.)

Talking about the UK, there really aren't any animosities. Any breakup would be entirely amicable. Although I know less about Spanish sentiments, I can't see why Spanish attitudes would be different - surely every well governed polity should be able to exit institutions which don't support local economies, infrastructure & culture? In the UK at least, the political mainstream recognises the principle of self determination. An independent Scotland (or Wales - though that won't happen any time soon) would be welcome in the EU. Surely, likewise with Catalonia.

On translation, you really are scraping for scratches. A piffling proportion of EU spending, which is a piffling proportion of EU GDP, is spent on translation. That isn't a significant consideration. In any case, there is movement in European institutions (just as in European businesses) towards greater use of English for international collaboration (or for documents with international audience). And automated translation is becoming sufficiently advanced that routine documents just don't need to be translated. Even with additional languages, translation expenses will probably fall with efficiency gains for European institutions. In any case, translation expenses are already insignificant.

If you want to argue for continued Catalan membership of Spain or Scottish membership of the UK, you really have to explain why larger decision making structures are more efficient for routine activities, why larger institutions are better at supporting local cultures, why larger bureaucracies make better resource allocations & payroll decisions, etc.

Speaking only of the Scottish case, there is enormous potential for unleashing private sector investment and cutting public sector costs - for more efficient government, while also for providing more support for the national culture, narrative, economy & society. The Catalan situation seems broadly similar (and there are about 50 similar cases across Europe). Why not?

What is the likely impact on human happiness & prosperity? States aren't important in themselves - they are only important where they add value for human beings.

If people living in Spain want to dissolve the state and organise public services through alternative political entities, so be it.

Agreed that there are risks involved in this - but risks of success as much as failure. More local government could well be more efficient government, with more support for diverse local cultures and more potential for wealth creation.

The messiness is largely a consequence of regulatory & budget decisions by the Spanish central government (most tax revenues go to the centre; regions were dependent on tax revenue from property development; central government has cut grants to regional government).

Catalonia makes massive net transfers to Spain, so would not have immediate post-independence fiscal problems (which rather dwarf the bailout). One would hope, however, that a newly forming state would be far more cautious in new commitments & liabilities (e.g. not providing pensions, minimising direct public sector employment of staff, etc).

An independent Catalonia might or might not be more competently managed & efficiently governed than Catalonia within Spain - that is the true test of whether independence would be a good thing.

So, Spanish constitution does NOT allow separation. WOW, that's less democratic than under the old Soviet constitution which DID allow Soviet republics to leave the UNION of SSR. Well, you know, the precedent has been set: Dissolve the Union ! This has been done. What you need now is three or more brave guys getting together and proclaiming dissolution of Spain ! Divide all state assets, replace Spain's delegations in the Eur. Parliament, replace one prime minister with at least three ! Why, the EU will have to think three times before declining to admit any part of the present state into the new EU ! Take a look, if Malta or Cyprus qualify for EU membership why not ANY part of the old Spanish Kingdom ?

So, Spanish constitution does NOT allow separation. WOW, that's less democratic than under the old Soviet constitution which DID allow Soviet republics to leave the UNION of SSR. Well, you know, the precedent has been set: Dissolve the Union ! This has been done. What you need now is three or more brave guys getting together and proclaiming dissolution of Spain ! Divide all state assets, replace Spain's delegations in the Eur. Parliament, replace one prime minister with at least three ! Why, the EU will have to think three times before declining to admit any part of the present state into the new EU ! Take a look, if Malta or Cyprus qualify for EU membership why not ANY part of the old Spanish Kingdom ?

They may have paid recently for other regions in Spain, but the same was not true a decade or so ago. They are partly enjoying the fruit of previous Spanish funding...
Plus it is not the central government who built up so much debt recently, it is the local one; Catalonia. Their debt is now junk and they can't borrow from the markets.

And again, apply the same thinking to Germany, and the EU just falls apart. I find it grotesque that they complain about transfer while they are still living on German's cash!

On EU accession requirements - all that's really required is democratic government and compliance with all chapters of EU regulation, along with unanimous approval from existing member states. Really, that's just institution building, competence building, a developed economy and a bit of diplomacy. Geographical location in Europe is helpful but not necessary - see Cyprus and accession talks with Turkey & Georgia, plus lots of speculation on future membership for Israel, Morocco & Lebanon.

Inter-regional government transfers are generally bad for prosperity - they create public/private sector wage differentials, making the private sector uncompetitive in recipient locations.

Catalonia should not be making large or permanent fiscal transfers (to support current spending) into the rest of Spain, just as Germany shouldn't be to other EU countries.

Debt write-downs, investment finance and lubrication of institutional changes are all potentially good. Risk mutualisation is good too (which can result in limited contingent fiscal transfers). But open ended, mostly one-directional fiscal transfers are bad for prosperity & human progress.

Whether or not Catalonia attains independence, all state institutions should seek localisation of compensation levels, and current spending operations which can sustainably be supported with locally sourced revenue.

Catalonia's transfers are not open ended, one-directional. Not so long ago they received from the transfers.

I think transfers are necessary and make economic sense. Call it as you wish, debt write-down, investment, risk mutualisation. At the end, it is a wealth transfer.
They smooth economic tumults, and make regions less inequal. Which is good for prosperity and human progress. Or at least so I believe.

That's where politics should oversee short-sight finance. On the long run, there are plenty of good reasons to transfer. Germany's demography is worrying, France may well pay for German's pension by 2050. Nothing is eternal, and our neighbors' prosperity is certainly a good investment.

No constitution permitts secession. The right of self determination applies only to colonies. As everybody knows Catalauña is not a colony. Why should we willingly let a corrupt clique of nationalist (ethnic and potentially racist) politicinas amputate Spain?. Why should we leave the 2 or more million catlans in the hands of these people ?. There is nothing democratic about secession unless of course all spaniards vote and we freely decide to change the constitution. In that case no problem

Of course, I am not advocating breaking up viable states
but let's not forget that state borders in Europe have been shifted all over the map for centuries. Some federal states are artificial creations of politicians with ego-centric sense of historial "importance."

As to my previous post, I had hoped all readers would have a sense of humor. By the way, the USSR constitution DID have a provision for a Union republic seceding from the Union. Not that any one ever tried untill the Union itself ceased to exist.

No other part of Spain but the Basque Country to some extent has Catalonia's characterictics and weight. Besides, many of the 17 autonomous regions are simply absurd: Cantabria, La Rioja, Madrid, Castilla-La Mancha, Extremadura, Murcia... (With due respect to the inhabitants and the history and culture of those regions and provinces, I am only referring to the purely territorial organization. El Bierzo and La Bureba are great, but it would have been ridiculous to make autonomous regions of them, something like "León-El Bierzo" or "Castilla-La Bureba".)

This can be seen in what happened after the Second Spanish Republic was proclaimed in 1931: in 1932 a statute of autonomy was granted to Catalonia because it was admitted and recognized that Catalonia had unique characteristics and historical rights within Spain. Only Catalonia at that moment. Autonomy for the Basque Country was granted in 1936, after the Spanish Civil War started.

PM Adolfo Suárez's "café para todos" (i.e. "coffee for everybody", autonomy for former historical kingdoms and regions but also for regions and provinces that didn't even want it or need it) was a gross and, in the long run, ruinous mistake, economically and politically. 17 administrative monsters, each with its huge bureaucracy, local politicians, "caciques", corruption, etc. Franco had died only three years earlier and the military, the Right and the Far Right, etc didn't like the idea of a new autonomy for Catalonia (which, perceived as the destruction of Spanish unity, was ONE of the reasons which led to the military rising and the civil war of 1936). The idea was to convince these still powerful people that autonomies were not dangerous for the sacrosanct unity of la Patria, the Fatherland, so they would accept the Catalan and Basque ones as well.

I can't see Galicia and Valencia separating from Spain and becoming independent countries, unless... they joined Portugal or Catalonia!

The origin comes from W. Wilson after the I World War on the basis of the prior demolition of the austro-hungary empire in the XIX century which culminated in the balkan war. Its most accepted interpretation in international law is of course far away from what certain catalan nationalists defend: secession. Spain is not an empire on its own land and Catalans are not an oppressed minority. Nationalist feeling (i.e the confusion between a state and an ethnia or "culture") is the most dangerous enemy of any european. The only thing achieved by Mr. Mas election has been the deepening of the division of a peaceful and admirable culture, the catalan people deserve much better than this. Why he has done it ? for money.

Was the Austro-Hungarian Empire 'demolished' in the 19th ("XIX") century? Ah! Years studying European history and that particular period to learn this now! As a matter of fact, this empire was still expanding when it formally annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1908, after having occupied it for 30 years!

And all that demolition "culminated in the balkan war"? Ah! How interesting. Which one, the First Balkan War of 1912-13 (Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria and Greece against the Ottoman Empire) or the Second Balkan War of 1913 (Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, the Ottoman Empire and Rumania against Bulgaria)? And in what way did these two wars "demolish" the Austro-Hungarian Empire or were the 'culmination' of said "demolition"? The Austro-Hungarian Empire was "demolished" when the Central Powers lost the Great War (later known as First World War) in 1918.

As for your fascinating and not-so-well-grounded theories about sovereignty, international law, secession, etc, where do you include the peaceful separation of Norway from Sweden in 1905 or the creation of Albania as an independent country in 1912-13?

I hope you realize that there are two different categories:

A) Objective facts, which you cannot manipulate and change as you wish if you want to be taken seriously. You do your 'cause' a disservice when you do these things, which reminds me again of the old Spanish saying "oír campanas y no saber dónde" (to hear bells and ignore where).

And

B) Subjective opinions of yours, which you are free to have, of course, including that "Mr. Mas" did what he did "for money", answering your own question, &c.

Germany and Italy no less were created in the XIX century as a result of the gradual disintegraion of that empire.You should continue your studies. Again self determination is a doctrine created by Wilson after the first world war. It does not apply to outright secession. It does not cover illegal attempts to divide an existing state. The examples you quote are the result of agreements. Now you may find romatic the idea of an oppressed minority fighting for freedom but the reality does not apply to Spain. And be careful what you wish for when dealing with nationalists. As regards Mas you obviously have a limited idea of the ideas and interests behind the catalan right nationalist party.

The central government is swimming in a pool full of liquidity of its own. No deficit there at all. That's why the "cuota de riesgo" is so low... and the backing of the Eurobank allows it to be kept at "reasonable" levels.

1/ Catalonia asked for a bail-out last August, and is now running with German's cash. Conveniently through the Spanish government. I find it indecent for the German that Catalans can even think of complaining about transfer to "lazy" Andalusia, when they are themselves "lazy" Spanish. It's the same laziness we are talking about...

2/ Catalonia has not always be net contributor and has benefited in the past from the very same transfer they are complaining now. I can't find the figures, I saw that long ago I can't remember where. But please prove me I'm wrong if you can...

I can understand the cultural or whatever other argument. But please stop with the economic ones. It is just irritating.

The central government is in arrears every now and then -why? and the biggest deficit in absolute terms is his.
As for when Catalonia has been a net receptor, please be specific: When and how much, please
So, the stubborn economic facts are irritating?. Sure. But facts they are.
Ah, by the way: You are right: "laziness" may at best be hanged on individual's sources at best, therefore this is not a trait of any collective: Andalusians or whoever. Certainly there are hotheads everywhere, and some arguing at the other side of the fence are... as well as quite from yours.
But "negar la mayor" will not solve anything. To widen the gap is as stupid for one side as it is for the other, BUT GAP THERE IS.

You forgot to add that it takes time for applicant 'nations' to show that they meet all of the EU entry requirements, chapter by chapter. Also, these requirements will soon include having national budgets under Brussels scrutiny, contributions to the EU schemes for bailing out failing economies, etc. And, as you note, since accession requires unanimous approval from all existing member states, this cannot be taken as a given.

I live in South-West France, not all that far from the Basque region: their independency claim would certainly gain from a Catalan success. My earlier point about translation is valid: there will be a requirement for all meetings, documents, etc to be translated into the new nations' languages and vice versa (regardless of the fact that French and English are the official EU languages).

How dishonest you are. You wrote,
-
"The origin comes from W. Wilson after the I World War on the basis of the prior demolition of the austro-hungary empire in the XIX century which culminated in the balkan war."
-
And that's a sheer stupidity and is wrong, even chronologically. By the way, it's either World War I or First World War, not "I World War" or "first world war"; Austro-Hungarian Empire, not "austro-hungary empire"; Balkan War (if you are referring to a concrete one, as you were). not "balkan war", etc. Your English writing level is almost as poor as your knowledge of history.
-
Now you have changed this and you write,
"as a result of the gradual disintegraion [sic] of that empire"
--
If there is something I don't like is dishonesty.
--
Of course I "continue my studies", that's why I know history much better than you do, as your posts clearly show. You keep hearing bells and ignoring where (oír campanas y no saber dónde). To begin with, the idea of self-determination is much older than Wilson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination and his famous Fourteen Points were issued in January 1918, not "after the first world war". And they were just a statement of principles, they are very rarely referred to as "doctrine" as you say. Perhaps you like this word.
--
For your information, I don't "wish" anything, believe it or not I have no dog in this fight. You obviously do. And a big one.
--
You don't have the slightest idea of what I know and I don't know about Artur Mas, CiU, etc because I haven't said anything about them, except my brief comment on what you said, so stop assuming things.
--
You guys do a great disservice to your "cause".

You are rude and confrontational. Quote your wiki knowledge if you like (although I would recommend real studies) but the fact is that the right you appear to recognise as universal is not applicable to this situation. I dont have a cause on this: I just find that simplistic and ignorant views of the reality do more harm than good particularly to the author (you), Buenas noches and try not to be that offensive. It is exhausting.

"The only thing achieved by Mr. Mas election has been the deepening of the division of a peaceful and admirable culture, the catalan people deserve much better than this. Why he has done it ? for money."

"And be careful what you wish for when dealing with nationalists. As regards Mas you obviously have a limited idea of the ideas and interests behind the catalan right nationalist party."

is not "rude and confrontational", of course. So, besides writing a very poor English and having a very vague—and wrong—notion of history, you resort to double standards, right?

Try to be something individually boy, not only collectivelly (Spain, etc).

And yes... it is exhausting to have a conversation with someone like you. I addressed your issues and proved you wrong, you didn't even address mine. With singers like you... the song is doomed. If I were your boss, I would fire you right now.

P.S. For your information, my knowledge is not "wiki", I studied at two universities (something you obviously have not) decades before the Internet, Google and Wikipedia were invented. You project yourself onto others.

You continue to be offensive. Now, you dont know me and I dont know you. Maybe if I knew you I would even like you (and not fire you) but meanwhile I recommend you not to get personal and enjoy life. Good luck with all your endeavours and apologies for my poor english.

And you continue to use double standards according to which you may be offensive but other people cannot.

You could never fire me because you could never be my boss.

Don't patronize me, I am almost surely senior to you and have a better education. I do enjoy life and have a very healthy sense of humour, as many posters here know well, don't worry about that.

Thank you, likewise.

Apologies accepted.

--------------------------

P.S. Remember: Austria-Hungary (the Austro-Hungarian Empire) was one of Europe's six great powers until 1918 and there were two Balkan wars, the First Balkan War and the Second Balkan War, not a "balkan war". All this is just for you to know history better when you impart lessons and for you to learn the correct use of names and capital letters in the English language. Don't bother to thank me, you're welcome.

Well, the cautions laid down in the American Declaration of independence tend to prevail. It takes a lot of bad government to create a desire for independence. A critical mass must be formed. A third of more adamantly in favor of a breach. This might be obtained if Madrid begins to put the squeeze on the Catalons.